Kris,
Give me the schema patches all at once, and I will apply them all at
once, otherwise we get out of sync with the current code.
and many thanks!
Dave
On Wed, 2002-09-11 at 03:19, Kris Jurka wrote:
> Barry Lind wrote:
> >
> > Patch partially applied.
> >
> > I didn't apply the changes to AbstractJdbc1DatabaseMetaData.java that
> > changes the FK_NAME being returned. The existing code is very explicit
> > that it is trying to return something unique for foreign key name and
> > the new code doesn't necessarily do that.
> >
> > Dave,
> >
> > Do you see any reason why this shouldn't be changed as this patch does?
> > I am uncomfortable applying this without your review.
> >
> > thanks,
> > --Barry
>
>
> With the changes to constraint handling in 7.3 this is not an issue
> because constraints are required to be unique per table. In <= 7.2 a
> unique name would be helpful. I suppose it depends on what the user
> plans on doing with the FK_NAME retrieved. If they are simply showing
> it uniqueness is good. If they plan on doing ALTER TABLE [FKTABLE_NAME]
> DROP CONSTRAINT [FK_NAME] then they need the real constraint name. I
> have no strong opinion on the subject because at the moment I am doing
> neither.
>
> On an unrelated note I have some other questions about the JDBC driver
> in general...
>
> What server versions does the JDBC driver target? Currently it can run
> the junit tests successfully on only 7.2 and 7.3. Is it desired to have
> these pass (by if(connection.haveMinimumServerVersion("x.y"))
> statements) on 7.1, 7.0, 6.5, ...? Even if the tests don't successfully
> run against these servers which servers are officially supported? Is
> there a minimum set of functionality that should be supported on all
> versions?
>
> I'm doing some more work on making DatabaseMetaData queries schema
> aware. Would you prefer patches in a one function at a time format or
> an all at once approach?
>
> Kris Jurka
>
>